mythoughts wrote:The Bain way is exactly what our government needs. Someone that will step in and close down ineffectual departments. You know, like the energy department, education department, the EPA, the IRS and a drawer full of others that are sucking up tax dollars simply to keep these employees on the payroll and their bosses in a position of power. If I were the Romney campaign manager I would use this to drive home the waste in government that needs to stop.

Indeed. It seems like only yesterday that we were told about the horrible inefficiency of having five federal agencies tasked with fighting wildfires, how we're spending billions of dollars on firefighting resources in places where they don't have fires, and how the agencies' efforts have devolved into turf wars. Every time the curtain is drawn back we see just how hopelessly inefficient and dysfunctional our Leviathan federal government has become, yet we're asked to believe that this very same government bureaucracy will do a brilliant job of managing our health care.

Yes, we could definitely use a turn-around expert to start cutting the bloat and inefficiency from our federal government. I hope Romney will be that guy. Time to stop Hoping and start Changing!

Absolutely! The best place to start making really deep cuts in government spending is where the waste is the most outrageous- the MILITARY. If the "defense" budget was cut by 50% across-the-board, there would still be massive waste. The U.S. would still build $50 billion weapons systems that were designed for the cold war that even the top generals say that we don't need. But, Romney plans to increase wasteful "defense" spending. Maybe the U.S. could invade Mexico or Bulgaria. Who knows? They may have weapons of mass destruction.

You want to gut the funding for the single most important thing that the federal government is charged with? Defending our country and making it a secure place to live. If our country doesn't have the ability to defend itself none of the rest of it matters. And don't forget there are many nations out there that would love the opportunity to take what America has. Not to mention the ones that would just like to destroy us. Brilliant!!

According to conservatives, the government is the source of all of our problems. We just need to get the government out of the way. So, why do conservatives think that the government can be trusted with maintaining our defense? Why not privatize defense? After all, if the government is handling defense, they MUST be wasting taxpayer dollars AND doing a lousy job. Right?

If the federal government only did one thing and one thing only it should be national security. If they got the hell out of every other aspect of americans lives maybe they could excel at what they do.

SL10 wrote:Yep. People are starting to wake up and see that if Mittens is elected he would sell out the U.S. to the highest bidder Bain style.

Yes so much that since the supreme court upheld Obamacare Romney has out paced Obama in donations so much that Obama was on the phone to his major doners while on Air Force One when he left Colorado. Looks like people really are waking up. The lefties are banking on Bain and with thousands of companies closing their doors since the community organizer took the wheel Bain isn't looking like the big bad wolf anymore. I know it's Bushs fault and will continue to be until 2016 if Obamo is re elected but people are tired of excuses. If that's the best they got Romney is your next President. Around about the first of September I expect the Romney campaign to drop the hammer on Obama and crews performance.

In the long run, polling in swing states suggesting that Mitt Romney's tenure at Bain Capital is hurting him could have larger implications for where this campaign will move.

SL10 wrote:Yep. People are starting to wake up and see that if Mittens is elected he would sell out the U.S. to the highest bidder Bain style.

In the long run, polling in swing states suggesting that Mitt Romney's tenure at Bain Capital is hurting him could have larger implications for where this campaign will move.

I think that he is simply the Manchurian candidate. After all, Chinese gov. supports Romney.

“... 1% of America funds almost 99% of the cost of political campaigns in America. Is it therefore any surprise that the government is responsive first to the needs of that 1%, and not to the 99%?" -Lawrence Lessig

SL10 wrote:Yep. People are starting to wake up and see that if Mittens is elected he would sell out the U.S. to the highest bidder Bain style.

Nope. Your guy, Obama, has already sold us out to China, to his cronies in bankrupted "green" industries, and to labor union thugs.

He sold us out to China?Exactly how?Did he pass a massive tax cut designed to send jobs there?Did he approve a number of DOD related tech companies being sent to China, such as magnequench?

“... 1% of America funds almost 99% of the cost of political campaigns in America. Is it therefore any surprise that the government is responsive first to the needs of that 1%, and not to the 99%?" -Lawrence Lessig

cbrew wrote:....Absolutely! The best place to start making really deep cuts in government spending is where the waste is the most outrageous- the MILITARY. If the "defense" budget was cut by 50% across-the-board, there would still be massive waste. The U.S. would still build $50 billion weapons systems that were designed for the cold war that even the top generals say that we don't need. But, Romney plans to increase wasteful "defense" spending. Maybe the U.S. could invade Mexico or Bulgaria. Who knows? They may have weapons of mass destruction.

If we cut the defense budget by 50%, the west would find itself in a world war within 10 years.That is a FACT.

In 2006, China's military budget was 4.3% of their GDP (larger than Americas).

What is missed is that over the last 6 years, China has announced each year, that the budget INCREASED relative to the GDP. IOW, it is now about 5%.If we cut our 4.06 (which included 2 wars funding), we would have to cut a massive amount of weapons systems. The fastest way to get into wars, is to have aggressive nations think that they are above you, AND that they have a POINT to prove. Do not believe that? Look at reagan and W. Both invaded for no real reasons.

And China is currently pushing hard on ALL of their neighbors. Except those that bow to China and gives them anything that they want.

Sorry bro, I agree with you on many topics, but when you put forward an opinion and then profer it as a fact you are way off base. The "fact" that another country would attack subsequent to a reduction in defense spending is unprovable thus your statement of fact is in fact wrong. An opinion, by definition, is not a fact, no matter how loud you shout the word fact.

Fair enough. It is opinion.However, it also matches with China's actions.

“... 1% of America funds almost 99% of the cost of political campaigns in America. Is it therefore any surprise that the government is responsive first to the needs of that 1%, and not to the 99%?" -Lawrence Lessig

Sure Thing wrote:Windblow...maybe you could provide some facts? Of course that woudn't help your cause. Your boy Obama is done as he has done nothing, except screw over ths country. Unfortunately that is what an intelligent American, would expect from a community organizer.

“... 1% of America funds almost 99% of the cost of political campaigns in America. Is it therefore any surprise that the government is responsive first to the needs of that 1%, and not to the 99%?" -Lawrence Lessig

mythoughts wrote:The Bain way is exactly what our government needs. Someone that will step in and close down ineffectual departments. You know, like the energy department, education department, the EPA, the IRS and a drawer full of others that are sucking up tax dollars simply to keep these employees on the payroll and their bosses in a position of power. If I were the Romney campaign manager I would use this to drive home the waste in government that needs to stop.

Indeed. It seems like only yesterday that we were told about the horrible inefficiency of having five federal agencies tasked with fighting wildfires, how we're spending billions of dollars on firefighting resources in places where they don't have fires, and how the agencies' efforts have devolved into turf wars. Every time the curtain is drawn back we see just how hopelessly inefficient and dysfunctional our Leviathan federal government has become, yet we're asked to believe that this very same government bureaucracy will do a brilliant job of managing our health care.

Yes, we could definitely use a turn-around expert to start cutting the bloat and inefficiency from our federal government. I hope Romney will be that guy. Time to stop Hoping and start Changing!

Absolutely! The best place to start making really deep cuts in government spending is where the waste is the most outrageous- the MILITARY. If the "defense" budget was cut by 50% across-the-board, there would still be massive waste. The U.S. would still build $50 billion weapons systems that were designed for the cold war that even the top generals say that we don't need. But, Romney plans to increase wasteful "defense" spending. Maybe the U.S. could invade Mexico or Bulgaria. Who knows? They may have weapons of mass destruction.

You want to gut the funding for the single most important thing that the federal government is charged with? Defending our country and making it a secure place to live. If our country doesn't have the ability to defend itself none of the rest of it matters. And don't forget there are many nations out there that would love the opportunity to take what America has. Not to mention the ones that would just like to destroy us. Brilliant!!

According to conservatives, the government is the source of all of our problems. We just need to get the government out of the way. So, why do conservatives think that the government can be trusted with maintaining our defense? Why not privatize defense? After all, if the government is handling defense, they MUST be wasting taxpayer dollars AND doing a lousy job. Right?

If the federal government only did one thing and one thing only it should be national security. If they got the hell out of every other aspect of americans lives maybe they could excel at what they do.

unfortunately that goes against the leftist agenda, and having the government think and 'take care of everything' and everyone. No matter how inefficient they are at doing it.

The Federal government can now tax YOU for simply being alive. How can that be considered being Free ?

Dunderheads like E.J. Dionne and other liberal is why we're in this economic mess were in. What's Dionne answer, the government.

Governments here or world wide can not support themselves, let along everyone else. We've see this in Wisconsin and other states around the country. Stockton California is bankrupt thinks to their government workers. We keep hearing the rich aren't paying their fair share. Well when is the government workers going to pay their fair share?

The state of Wisconsin, thanks to Scott Walker, hasn't had to lay off any teachers, firemen, or police officers. Will the E.J. Dionne's be able to say the same for places like Stockton, California? There are examples after examples of cities and states workers having refused their freebies resulting in layoffs, and examples after examples where city and states workers have conceded and avoided layoffs.

The largest School District here has two bonds issue this year. One for infrastructure the other "for the children". The issue for the children is 35 million dollars, 29 million goes for teacher's benefits. The district is going broke, thanks to the teachers union. Only Six million goes for the children, and we are constantly told Republicans hate children. Who's taking the money from "the children" and using children for their benefit?

When Obama says the Republican are standing in the way of job creation, because they won't pass this or that stimulus, it NOT about stimulus, it's baling out city and state unions that Obama is concerned about. Mainly because city and state unions are Democrat slush funds. Members pay dues, those dues go to Democrat politician's. Like the teacher's here, Obama is looking out for Obama.

You "progressives" won't believe how expensive healthcare is when it's "free".

In order to be true to your anti-progressive right-wing beliefs, you must have passed up Medicare, or plan to do so when you become eligible.

Right?

it is much different to believe in a social safety net for the elderly, and having the federal government try and provide a safety net for all of society. that is the difference between the leftist thinking and being a compassionate conservative.

there is nothing wrong with providing our elderly this perk for all their years of work when they retire to make sure they can live their last years with some dignity and have help when needed. but when we start mandating the federal government to do that for everyone , you see government having to violate rights in order to do it. example, now the federal government has decided it has the right to tax all people for simply being alive.. to do what is 'right'. No matter how you argue it, we are no longer free men nor do we live in a free country because of that type of thinking.

The Federal government can now tax YOU for simply being alive. How can that be considered being Free ?

SL10 wrote:Yep. People are starting to wake up and see that if Mittens is elected he would sell out the U.S. to the highest bidder Bain style.

Nope. Your guy, Obama, has already sold us out to China, to his cronies in bankrupted "green" industries, and to labor union thugs.

If anyone has "sold us out to China," it is "your guy" Romney and all the laissez-faire capitalists out there like him. For the sake of their own profits, they would send every job they could to the Third World.

You "progressives" won't believe how expensive healthcare is when it's "free".

In order to be true to your anti-progressive right-wing beliefs, you must have passed up Medicare, or plan to do so when you become eligible.

Right?

I was perfectly content with BC/baloney (Blue Cross/Blue Shield). I had no problem with the premium and co-pays. When I turned 65 I lost my choices. Medicare card showed up in the mail and BC/baloney dropped me. Now, when I get the settlement statements from the gubmint and see how little Medicare pays Doctors, I feel like I'm commiting theft of services. If I was a Doctor I'd refuse to accept Medicare patients. And it's starting to look like a LOT of Doctors will be leaving the profession when ObamaCare kicks in.

I just had a thought the "progressives" will probably love. Now that gubmint can compel us to do just about anything why not have gubmint agents inspect the homes of the "evil rich"? If the "evil rich guys" have surplus rooms in their houses lets have the gubmint exercise eminent domain and take those extra rooms away from those fat cats. The gubmint could then move homeless people into the surplus rooms and solve the homeless problem.

What do you think?

Last edited by TFrancis on July 3rd, 2012, 7:09 am, edited 1 time in total.

Obama understands his constituents perfectly. They don't care what he does to the Constitution, the economy or his "enemies," as long as he provides them with gay marriage, legalized weed and a recharged EBT card the first of every month.

You "progressives" won't believe how expensive healthcare is when it's "free".

In order to be true to your anti-progressive right-wing beliefs, you must have passed up Medicare, or plan to do so when you become eligible.

Right?

it is much different to believe in a social safety net for the elderly, and having the federal government try and provide a safety net for all of society. that is the difference between the leftist thinking and being a compassionate conservative.

there is nothing wrong with providing our elderly this perk for all their years of work when they retire to make sure they can live their last years with some dignity and have help when needed. but when we start mandating the federal government to do that for everyone , you see government having to violate rights in order to do it. example, now the federal government has decided it has the right to tax all people for simply being alive.. to do what is 'right'. No matter how you argue it, we are no longer free men nor do we live in a free country because of that type of thinking.

How do you handle the cognitive dissonance of your competing arguments?

CURBAN wrote:.... No matter how you argue it, we are no longer free men nor do we live in a free country because of that type of thinking.

These are the kind of absolutist, wacko marching orders that worry the sane among us.

Some here have mentioned and even advocated civil war as an alternative. Many weak minds out there will nod and agree that violence is their only recourse. What about VOTING, and living with the results?

You "progressives" won't believe how expensive healthcare is when it's "free".

In order to be true to your anti-progressive right-wing beliefs, you must have passed up Medicare, or plan to do so when you become eligible.

Right?

I was perfectly content with BC/baloney (Blue Cross/Blue Shield). I had no problem with the premium and co-pays. When I turned 65 I lost my choices. Medicare card showed up in the mail and BC/baloney dropped me. Now, when I get the settlement statements from the gubmint and see how little Medicare pays Doctors, I feel like I'm commiting theft of services. If I was a Doctor I'd refuse to accept Medicare patients. And it's starting to look like a LOT of Doctors will be leaving the profession when ObamaCare kicks in.

I just had a thought the "progressives" will probably love. Now that gubmint can compel us to do just about anything why not have gubmint agents inspect the homes of the "evil rich"? If the "evil rich guys" have surplus rooms in their houses lets have the gubmint exercise eminent domain and take those extra rooms away from those fat cats. The gubmint could then move homeless people into the surplus rooms and solve the homeless problem.

What do you think?

I personally know dozens of people who have both Medicare and BC/baloney. My wife and I are two of them. The premiums aren't cheap and probably are more than our out-of-pocket medical costs would be — for now. If we get really sick, the coverage will be a blessing.

Isn't that the way insurance is supposed to work — you pay more in premiums than costs would be until and unless a major need arises?

CURBAN wrote:.... No matter how you argue it, we are no longer free men nor do we live in a free country because of that type of thinking.

These are the kind of absolutist, wacko marching orders that worry the sane among us.

Some here have mentioned and even advocated civil war as an alternative. Many weak minds out there will nod and agree that violence is their only recourse. What about VOTING, and living with the results?

Some years ago Congress was working on removing Marion Berry from office as Mayor of DC. Jesse Jackson started screaming about Congress overruling the Democratic process. At the same time Jesse was in California looking for a friendly judge who could declare Prop 209, the California Civil Rights Initiative unconstitutional thereby overturning the Democratic process.

Just like everything else with "progressives" VOTING is situationally dependent.

Obama understands his constituents perfectly. They don't care what he does to the Constitution, the economy or his "enemies," as long as he provides them with gay marriage, legalized weed and a recharged EBT card the first of every month.

You "progressives" won't believe how expensive healthcare is when it's "free".

In order to be true to your anti-progressive right-wing beliefs, you must have passed up Medicare, or plan to do so when you become eligible.

Right?

I was perfectly content with BC/baloney (Blue Cross/Blue Shield). I had no problem with the premium and co-pays. When I turned 65 I lost my choices. Medicare card showed up in the mail and BC/baloney dropped me. Now, when I get the settlement statements from the gubmint and see how little Medicare pays Doctors, I feel like I'm commiting theft of services. If I was a Doctor I'd refuse to accept Medicare patients. And it's starting to look like a LOT of Doctors will be leaving the profession when ObamaCare kicks in.

I just had a thought the "progressives" will probably love. Now that gubmint can compel us to do just about anything why not have gubmint agents inspect the homes of the "evil rich"? If the "evil rich guys" have surplus rooms in their houses lets have the gubmint exercise eminent domain and take those extra rooms away from those fat cats. The gubmint could then move homeless people into the surplus rooms and solve the homeless problem.

What do you think?

I personally know dozens of people who have both Medicare and BC/baloney. My wife and I are two of them. The premiums aren't cheap and probably are more than our out-of-pocket medical costs would be — for now. If we get really sick, the coverage will be a blessing.

Isn't that the way insurance is supposed to work — you pay more in premiums than costs would be until and unless a major need arises?

Medicare is prime. Other insurance, including the Blues, is supplementary. I also have supplemental coverage.

Obama understands his constituents perfectly. They don't care what he does to the Constitution, the economy or his "enemies," as long as he provides them with gay marriage, legalized weed and a recharged EBT card the first of every month.

You "progressives" won't believe how expensive healthcare is when it's "free".

In order to be true to your anti-progressive right-wing beliefs, you must have passed up Medicare, or plan to do so when you become eligible.

Right?

it is much different to believe in a social safety net for the elderly, and having the federal government try and provide a safety net for all of society. that is the difference between the leftist thinking and being a compassionate conservative.

there is nothing wrong with providing our elderly this perk for all their years of work when they retire to make sure they can live their last years with some dignity and have help when needed. but when we start mandating the federal government to do that for everyone , you see government having to violate rights in order to do it. example, now the federal government has decided it has the right to tax all people for simply being alive.. to do what is 'right'. No matter how you argue it, we are no longer free men nor do we live in a free country because of that type of thinking.

How do you handle the cognitive dissonance of your competing arguments?

Life is a big sh*t sandwich when you get old. However able bodied Men of working age should not be taken care of by government at the expense of others freedom and $$.. does that help clear up your proletarianization position on what was said ??

The Federal government can now tax YOU for simply being alive. How can that be considered being Free ?

You "progressives" won't believe how expensive healthcare is when it's "free".

In order to be true to your anti-progressive right-wing beliefs, you must have passed up Medicare, or plan to do so when you become eligible.

Right?

As soon as I receive my check for roughly $550,000 I will gladly opt out of Medicare and SS. That is the amount I would have in my personal account had I been allowed to opt out during my time paying into those programs. Asking people to opt out of receiving the benefits for an insurance program they have been paying for over 30,40 or 50 years, is ridiculous. Why not ask the people currently paying into those programs if they would like to opt out?

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." Oct 11 1798John Adams (Nation's 2nd President)